Talk:WAFB

Neutrality Dispute
Some of the statements on this page are very biased towards the station. Take a look at this section of statements:

"Today, WAFB brings its viewers 25 hours of news programming each week. Presently, WAFB is the only network station in the market to air a complete rebroadcast of every locally produced newscast, plus a live weekend noon news product on their second cable station, News Channel 9. Their anchors, reporters, producers and photographers have won numberous awards from the Associated Press and the Louisiana Association of Broadcasters. A number of investigative reports by WAFB 9 News on various topics have even resulted in changes in state law.

While news and programming are our broadcast trademarks, WAFB is constantly being honored for its community service. Channel 9 donates over $1.25 million in public service air time each year. The list of station promotions to help local non-profit organizations is lengthy, with the St. Jude Dream Home Giveaway, the St. Vincent de Paul Uniform Drive, the Volunteer! Baton Rouge Volunteer recognition program and Kids Comforting Kids, to name a few.

The station's news broadcast easily defeats local rival station WBRZ in ratings. More than twice as many people watch WAFB's broadcast."

--CFIF 21:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

- I've edited out the ad copy. Frankly, this excised phrase pretty much gives everything away: "While news and programming are *our* broadcast trademarks" (emphasis added). I worked for WAFB for five years in the 1990's. I would like to think they'd know better than to inject ad copy into this kind of reference material. -- user:MKabel 10:48, 28 February 2006

Correct! This was copied from Raycom's page. See Talk:WBXH-CA. -Tracker 17:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Adding unreferenced entries of former employees to lists containing BLP material
Hello, Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to the list of former employees in articles. Including this type of material in articles does not abide by current consensus and its inclusion is strongly discouraged in our policies and guidelines. The rationales are as follows:


 * 1) WP:NOT tells us, Wikipedia is "not an indiscriminate collection of information." As that section describes, just because something is true, doesn't necessarily mean the info belongs in Wikipedia.
 * 2) As per WP:V, we cannot include information in Wikipedia that is not verifiable and sourced.
 * 3) WP:Source list tells us that lists included within articles (including people's names) are subject to the same need for references as any other information in the article.
 * 4) Per WP:BLP, we have to be especially careful about including un-sourced info about living persons.

If you look at articles about companies in general, you will not find mention of previous employees, except in those cases where the employee was particularly notable. Even then, the information is not presented just as a list of names, but is incorporated into the text itself (for example, when a company's article talks about the policies a previous CEO had, or when they mention the discovery/invention of a former engineer/researcher). If a preexisting article is already in the encyclopedia for the person you want to add to a list, it's generally regarded as sufficient to support their inclusion in list material in another article. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 13:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)